What do you think?
Rate this book
An Examination of Conscience of the Understanding: Empirical Proof of the Existence of God
An Examination of Conscience of the Empirical Proof of the Existence of God
by Richard L. Scott
Seeking his own utmost depth of comprehensive understanding, the author sets out to prove empirically that God exists. The seed of proof is the Birth Paradox, its florescence a faith grounded in his spirituality disposed As empirically real as his conscious self, as mathematically certain as the probability laws of genetic science, as necessary as that the universe requires a creator for its rational possibility, as immanently intuitive as the Divine Allegory he mirrors.
The Birth Paradox is the contingency of personal conscious existence on the body. Is there any scientific or commonsense belief as certain of itself? And yet, as a practical proposition, it is an utterly impossible conjunction! Personal consciousness is necessary specific to its own experience, a subtly profound tautology! How is it, then, that one’s necessary being can be dependent on a chance body?
About the Author
Richard L. Scott was born and raised in the small village of Lewisville (Monroe County), Ohio, the third of twelve children. He attended Ohio State University in Columbus, earning a B.S. in Education in 1958 and an M.A. in School Guidance in 1972. Over the years, he pursued very extensive graduate studies. After graduation in 1958 he coached high school sports briefly, then was drafted into the U.S. Army, serving in Germany in 1960-61.
Richard’s career broadly was spent in Education and Education related employment.
Notably, he served as Student Services Supervisor in Project Ohio Newgate, a pilot program in higher education for the Ohio adult penal system administered by the Ohio Board of Regents. His most gratifying teaching experience was of a high school senior psychology class at Berkley, Michigan High School.
He ultimately became employed by the Columbus Public Schools in various teaching, counseling, and quasi-administrative roles until retirement.
by Richard L. Scott
Seeking his own utmost depth of comprehensive understanding, the author sets out to prove empirically that God exists. The seed of proof is the Birth Paradox, its florescence a faith grounded in his spirituality disposed As empirically real as his conscious self, as mathematically certain as the probability laws of genetic science, as necessary as that the universe requires a creator for its rational possibility, as immanently intuitive as the Divine Allegory he mirrors.
The Birth Paradox is the contingency of personal conscious existence on the body. Is there any scientific or commonsense belief as certain of itself? And yet, as a practical proposition, it is an utterly impossible conjunction! Personal consciousness is necessary specific to its own experience, a subtly profound tautology! How is it, then, that one’s necessary being can be dependent on a chance body?
About the Author
Richard L. Scott was born and raised in the small village of Lewisville (Monroe County), Ohio, the third of twelve children. He attended Ohio State University in Columbus, earning a B.S. in Education in 1958 and an M.A. in School Guidance in 1972. Over the years, he pursued very extensive graduate studies. After graduation in 1958 he coached high school sports briefly, then was drafted into the U.S. Army, serving in Germany in 1960-61.
Richard’s career broadly was spent in Education and Education related employment.
Notably, he served as Student Services Supervisor in Project Ohio Newgate, a pilot program in higher education for the Ohio adult penal system administered by the Ohio Board of Regents. His most gratifying teaching experience was of a high school senior psychology class at Berkley, Michigan High School.
He ultimately became employed by the Columbus Public Schools in various teaching, counseling, and quasi-administrative roles until retirement.
480 pages, Kindle Edition
Published January 30, 2017
3 people are currently reading
12 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
Read
January 10, 2025I've taken three philosophy classes at Wheaton College so far, so that's the high and mighty philosophy throne I critique this work from.
I have never read another book that made me viscerally angry- from its grammar. Even the title is so deeply steeped in the author's own convoluted interior nomenclature that it's impossible to parse through. The author has convinced himself that there is significant overlap across many philosophical readings which the author has identified and applied his own terminology to describe this paradigmatic reimagining.
As a person of faith, I feel some responsibility to be "on the same team" as it were, but the way this author refers to both the content and the implications of the other philosophical works that he cites evinces a mastery of the text that the author doesn't really seem to demonstrate based on his conclusions or manners of argumentation.
For someone to claim to have enjoyed this book they'd have to be too much of a pushover to admit they didn't understand any of it. To even consider the claims given in this labyrinth one has to parse through dense religious thought processes that are unique to this particular author, command a decently broad mastery of many different philosophical works, have a sufficiently advanced perspective on the standard arguments for God made by several different church leaders both ancient and modern, and it would still take anger management classes.
This book serves as a scathing indictment of self publishing, so convoluted it's comparable to watching a bad movie to laugh at.
If I didn't laugh I'd cry, and I was frequently tempted.
Sorry, Richard.
I have never read another book that made me viscerally angry- from its grammar. Even the title is so deeply steeped in the author's own convoluted interior nomenclature that it's impossible to parse through. The author has convinced himself that there is significant overlap across many philosophical readings which the author has identified and applied his own terminology to describe this paradigmatic reimagining.
As a person of faith, I feel some responsibility to be "on the same team" as it were, but the way this author refers to both the content and the implications of the other philosophical works that he cites evinces a mastery of the text that the author doesn't really seem to demonstrate based on his conclusions or manners of argumentation.
For someone to claim to have enjoyed this book they'd have to be too much of a pushover to admit they didn't understand any of it. To even consider the claims given in this labyrinth one has to parse through dense religious thought processes that are unique to this particular author, command a decently broad mastery of many different philosophical works, have a sufficiently advanced perspective on the standard arguments for God made by several different church leaders both ancient and modern, and it would still take anger management classes.
This book serves as a scathing indictment of self publishing, so convoluted it's comparable to watching a bad movie to laugh at.
If I didn't laugh I'd cry, and I was frequently tempted.
Sorry, Richard.
Displaying 1 of 1 review